










“ PHILOLOG) 


ne PUBLISHED UNDER TA DIREC TLON OF 


: : THE PHTLOLO GICAL CLUB OF THE. UNIVERSITY “OF 
: eee oe LEN pan et 20 ERE ihe NORTH. CARCHINA 





iow ‘oe: Error 


VOL. 1 


Ne 


oe _ Version ee 


Studies i in y the Syntax af the Ki ng Jamos 


EAM Mosis. G IRAING ke eee - 


ae 


¥ 


“CHAPEL, HILL ; 


a UNIVERSEDY. PRERS 
AOE be 








PSD siggs Me 
LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 


PRINCETON. N. J. 


PRESENTED BY 


Are Gr, \los, D>. 


Wrbrarmy of 
Prinecton University. 





Der Sib Tamine PE 


English 
Seminary. 


Presented ly 


Mn. C Reena ae he! | YR 





A it 


< 5 

Wp Pps oN, ’ 

PT ie 
nr 


Legs 





STUDIES IN PHILOLOGY 


PUBLISHED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF 
THE PHILOLOGICAL CLUB OF THE UNIVERSITY OF 
NORTH CAROLINA 


C. ALPHONSO SMITH, Epiror 


VOU. I! 


v 


Studies in the Syntax of the King James 
Version 


JAMES MOSES GRAINGER 


CHAPEL HILL 


THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 
1907 





CONTENTS 


CHAPTER I 
INTRODUCTION. ...... 

CHAPTER Ii 
The IMPERSONAL CONSTRUCTION .. 


CHAPTER III 


DISTRIBUTIVE PHRASING ........ 


CHAPTER IV 


BO MORMS ite viii wes 
CHAPTER V 

RELATIVE PRONOUNS ...... 
CHAPTER VI 


SuBsJUNCTIVE Moop......... 





PAGE 


10 


14 


19 


28 


50 


P. U. Duplicaté 





STUDIES: IN . THE, SYNIAX OF “THE, KING 
JAMES VERSION * 


CHAT RT BR I 


INTRODUCTION 


In offering their new version of the English Bible to King 
James in 1611, the translators declared in the dedication that 
they were merely ‘‘poor instruments to make God’s holy 
Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people,” and 
that to this end, in their translating they had ‘‘walked in the 
ways of simplicity and integrity, as before the Lord.” On 
the title page we find the familiar words: ‘‘Appointed to be 
read in the churches.” It seems, then, that the chief aim of 
the translators was to present Bible truth in a form (1) sim- 
ple enough to be understood by illiterate people and (2) suit- 
able for reading aloud with impressiveness and perfect intelli- 
gibility. These are in general the principles which control 
the syntax of the King James Version, and which have doubt- 
less given our masterful Bible its influence upon the language. 
Since the thorough dissemination of this book among all class- 
es and conditions of English speaking people, English syn- 
tax has certainly been developing along lines of simplicity 
and easy intelligibility. 

Yet this version did more than to forecast future tendencies 
in English syntax: it recorded past development. It summed 
up in many ways the transition from Late Middle to Early 
Modern English. Itis an epitome of the development of 
English syntax from Tyndale’s time to 1611. First among 
the several reasons for this compendious nature of the syntax 


*A paper presented to the Faculty of the University of North Carolina as 
a partial requirement for the degree of Master of Arts. 


6 James Moses Grainger 


of the version of 1611 was the use of the Bishops’ Bible of 1568 
as a common basis for the new version, by all of the six dif- 
ferent companies who worked on the translation. The code 
of instuctions, given by the king to this body of biblical stu- 
dents, directed them to follow the Bishops’ Bible with as few 
alterations as truth would permit and to use the translations 
by Tyndale (1525-1535), Matthew (1537), and Coverdale 
(1532-1537), the Whitchurch or Great Bible (1549), and the 
Geneva Bible (1560), when these versions agreed better with 
the text than the Bishops’ Bible (1568). As the dates show, 
this chain of successive translations stretches over an impor- 
tant transitional period in the history of English. The Bish- 
ops’ Bible, the final link in the chain, being itself based to a 
great extent on former translations, and being the chief basis 
for the King James Version, naturally imparted, to the new 
version the synoptic nature of its own syntax, including the 
main features of the English language at that time, the late 
middle of the sixteenth century. The new version in turn 
reflected syntactic development from 1568 to1611. For this 
was the time during which the translators themselves acquired 
their mother tongue. They, while retaining most of the 
syntactic features of the older translations, naturally put 
their own living syntax into their alterations. Thus itcame 
about that Bible English is English of no fixed time but rep- 
resents a long period when the language was in transition. 

Another reason for the compendious nature of Bible syntax 
was the above-mentioned popular aim of the translators. 
Popular speech is at once the most conservative and the most 
progressive element ina language. It retains old idioms 
longer and adopts new ones more readily than literary lan- 
guage. If the translators had been producing a work for 
scholars, they would have used the medial literary language; 
but in adapting their work to the ear of the people, they fa- 
vored the popular style with all it embraces of both archaisms 
and neologisms. 

Yet the translators could not work without some norm by 
which to regulate their style. It was natural, therefore, that 


Syntax of the King James Version d 


they should set up, as their standard, either conciously or un- 
conciously, the authors who were considered classic in their 
time. Exactly who these would be can hardly be settled to- 
day, but we are justified in assuming that, just as today an 
author’s work must have lived at least half a century before 
the title of classic is assured, soin the first decade of the sev- 
enteenth century the prose writers who would be taken as 
models by the scholars translating the Bible, would most 
likely be the best polemic and secular writers of at least two 
generations earlier. This would be especially true in a time 
when the language was shifting and nothing late could be 
accepted as permanent. ‘The conservative influence of relig- 
ion, together with the natural dignity and impressiveuess of 
the archaic, would operate also toward the retention of the 
older idioms. ‘Therefore, while the translators must needs 
have reproduced very late usages and followed recent tenden- 
cies to some extent, their work in its main features presents 
characteristics of times earlier than their own. 

Because Bible syntax does represent transition English, 
scarcely a rule can be fixed for any usage that was variable 
during the period represented. A few general principles can 
be pointed out, but.no hard and fast laws of practice can be 
established. The object of the treatment in hand is to show 
some of these general principles by studying the use of cer- 
tain constructions and forms. These studies make no pre- 
tense to exhaustiveness. More particularly, the aim is to 
show how the translators followed their expressed purpose of 
making the Bible simple and intelligible for the illiterate, 
and impressive when read aloud, and how, being little con- 
stricted by rules of grammar, and using English as they 
found it, they gave us a mosaic made up from transient stages 
in the development of the language. 

In this investigation no work on Bible syntax has been 
available. Scholars seem to have avoided the subject because, 
in the first place, the Bible being a translation, the ancient 
tongues must necessarily have impressed their idiom upon the 
language of the translation, and to a certain extent kept the 


8 James Moses Grainger 


original genius of the English language from asserting itself 
strongly. In the second place, scholars have not cared to 
investigate closely the syntax of a translation that represents 
the individuality of no one man or period. The Authorized 
Version, however, because of its immense popularity, has 
exerted a greater influence upon the subsequent development 
of English syntax than any other body of literature. In 
view of this influence, any investigation of Bible syntax 
immediately justifies itself. Most of the books and treatises 
mentioned in the bibliography below have contributed to the 
results merely by suggestion. Cruden’s Concordance, which 
has served mainly in locating words and passages, has prac- 
tically no other use to the student of syntax. Particular ref- 
erence to other works will appear at the proper places. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


The Holy Bible containing the Old and New Testaments. 
Oxford University Press. 

The Holy Bible, an exact reprint page for page of the 
Authorized Version, r6zz._ Oxford University Press, 1833. 

The Holy Bible, American Revision. New York, 1901. 

Allen and Greenough, Latzn Grammar. Boston, 1891. 

C. S. Baldwin, Zhe /nflections and Syntax of the Morte 
d’ Arthur of Sir Thomas Malory. Boston, 1894. 

Alexander Cruden, A Complete Concordance to the Old 
and New Testaments. Wondon. 

EK. Hinenkel, ‘‘Syntax”. Grundriss der Germanischen Phil- 
ologie, I. Band. Strassburg, 1901. 

W. Franz, Shakespeare-Grammatik. Halle, 1900. 

B. L. Gildersleeve, Latin Grammar. New York, 1898. 

H. W. Hoare, The Evolution of the English Bible. Won- 
don, 1902. 

L. Kellner, Historical Outlines of English Syntax. Won- 
don, 1892. 

C. Alphonso Smith, Studies in English Syntax. Boston, 
1906. 


‘ 


Syntax of the King James Version o 


H. Sweet, A New English Grammar, Logical and His- 
torical, Il. ‘‘Syntax.” Oxford, 1903. 

L. R. Wilson, Chaucer's Relative Constructions. Chapel 
Hill, 1906. 

W. Van der Gaaf, Zhe Transition from Impersonal to 
Personal in Middle English. Amsterdam, 1904. 

Westcott and Hort, Editors, Zhe Mew Testament in the 
Original Greek. ondon, 1903. 


CHAPTER II 


THE ImpPpERSONAL CONSTRUCTION 


The transition from the impersonal construction, which 
prevailed with certain verbs in Middle English, to the per- 
sonal construction of today appears almost as complete in 
Bible English as it is today. The ‘‘really impersonal’™ con- 
structions, as in 7 rained (Lu. 17:29), zt thundered 
(John 12:29) are used in the Bible just as they are today and 
require notreatment here. ‘The ‘‘quasi impersonal verbs’, 
however, which ‘‘have z¢ for their grammatical, provisional 
subject, while the real logical subject is expressed in the form 
of a clause’*, show differences from both the previous Middle 
English usage and the later, current English usage, as in, 

ft repented the Lord that he had made man. Gen. 6:6. 


Judas’ \.) '.:° .. wwepented himsel]. Matta 1 so: 
The Lord repented that he had made Saul king. 1 Sam. 
doi3D, 


The first example shows the purely impersonal construction 
of Middle English; the second shows the intermediate or 
transitional, half personal, or reflexive construction; and the 
third shows the late purely personal construction. The three 
examples illustrate completely the change from impersonal to 
personal. Some verbs with which the impersonal construc- 
tion was habitual in Middle English preserve the usage intact; 
others retain only remnants or reminiscences of it; while with 
most of them the usage has disappeared entirely. The fol- 
lowing list represents the remnants: 
Befall occurs once impersonally: 
And they that saw it told them how zt befell to him that 
was possessed. Mk. 5:16. 
Behove, used only impersonally, occurs twice: 


*Van der Gaaf, The Transition from Impersonal to Personal in Middle 
English. Amsterdam, 1904. 


Syntax of the King James Version 11 


It behoved him to be made like unto his brethren. Heb. 
malts 
And thus z¢ dehoved Christ to suffer. Lu. 24:46. 

Grieve preserved both personal and impersonal usages as it 

does today. Four examples of the impersonal occur: 

For zt grieveth me much for your sakes that the hand of 
the Lord is gone out against me. Ruth1:13. Gen. 6:6, 
Neh. 2:10, Prov. 26:15. ; 

Happen, usually personal, occurs four times impersonally: 
As it happeneth to the fool, so zt happeneth even to me. 
Wcciwe 157 2 Petr 2:22eWccl. -8:14. 

Like occurs three times in the old impersonal sense now lost: 
He shall dwell with thee . . . where zt liketh him 
best. Deut. 23:16. 

Write ye also for the Jews, as zt liketh you. Esther 8:8. 

For this Liketh you, O ye children of Israel. Amos 4:5. 
iVeed occurs once impersonally: 

And Esau said, Let me now leave with thee some of the 

folk that are with me. And he said, What needeth it? 

Gen. 33:15. 


Please shows the same adaptation to both personal and im- 
personal usage that it has today: 
If zt please thee, I will give thee another vineyard. 
1 Kings 21:6. 
Yet zt pleased the Lord to bruise him. Isa. 53:10. 
If the Lord were pleased to kill us. Judges 13:23. 
They please themselves in the children of strangers. 
Isa. 2:6. 
It shall accomplish that which I please. Isa, 55:11. 
repent had three varieties of use: 
1. Steflextve: (5 instances) 
lidasiurin. 1 cepented hamself.) Matt. 27:3. 
2. Personal: (numerous instances) 
The Lord repented that he had made Saul king. 
1 Sam. 15:35. 
3. Lmpersonal: (5 instances) 
Lt repented the Lord that he had made man on earth 


12 James Moses Grainger 


and the Lord said . . . wa repenteth me 
that I have made them. Gen. 6:6,7. 
It repented the Lord because of their groanings. 
Judges 5:18. 
It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king. 
1 Sam. 15:11. 
Return, O Lord, how long? and let zt repent thee con- 
cerning thy servants. Psalm 90:13. 
Seem is used both personally and impersonally as today. 
Instances of impersonal use are: 
And if z¢ seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you 
this day whom ye will serve. Joshua 24:15. 
Seemeth it but a small thing unto you? Num. 16:9. 
Think recalls its old impersonal use in several ways: 
Me thinketh the running of the foremost is like the run- 
ning of Ahimaaz. 1Sam. 18:27. 
He thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone, (for the 
old hym thought scorn.) Esther 3:6. 
Paul thought not goodto take him with them. Ane 15:38, 
The reflexive eva occurs twice: 
If they shall dethink themselves. 1 Kings 8:47, 2 Chron. 
6:37. 


The following formerly impersonal verbs, though never 
used impersonally in the King James Version, seem, in dif- 
ferent ways, to preserve at least relics suggestive of their 
former use: 

Ail preserves a questionable reminiscence of its former imper- 
sonal use only in the question, ‘‘What aileth (ailed) thee?” 
which occurs seven times: 

They said to Micah, what az/eth thee? Judges 18:23. 

Dream, though not used impersonally, in ten occurrences out 
of thirteen is transitive and takes a cognate object: 

Your old men dream dreams. Joel 2:28. 
And Joseph dreamed a dream. Gen, 37:5. 

Lack, though never quite impersonal, seems to hesitate about 
taking a personal subject when used in the sense of ‘‘to be 
absent,” and avoids the difficulty three times, as far, at 


Syntax of the King James Version 13 


least, as order of words is concerned, by inverting subject 
and predicate and_beginning the sentence with ¢here in 
place of the old impersonal 7? 
And there /acketh not one man of us. Num. 31:49, 
There /acked of David’s servants nineteen men. 2 Sam. 
2:30. 
Peradventure there shall /ack five of the fifty righteous 
Gen, 18:28. 
Want also suggests an impersonal reminiscence in inversion 
with there: 
In a multitude of words there wanteth not sin. Prov. 10:19. 


Impersonal usages that are exceedingly common in the Bible 
are: 

/t shall come to pass. Ex. 3:21, etc. 
That z¢ may go well with thee. Deut. 4:40, etc. 
With the verb Zo de: 
Woe ts me that I sojourn in Meshech. Psalm 120:5. 
It zs better for me to die than to live. Jonah 4:3. (4 of 
this type). 
ft zs better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in 
man. Psalm 118:8. (9 of this type). 
Better vt ts that it be said to thee, come up hither; than 
that thou shouldest be put lower. Prov. 25:7. (4 of this 
type). 
lt ts better 1 give her to thee than another. Gen. 29:19. 
(2 of this type). 
Then was zt better with me than now. Hos. 2:7. 
If 7¢ be your mind, that I should bury my dead. Gen. 
23:8. 
How zs z¢ that ye are come so soon today? Ex. 2:18. 
Let z¢ now be dry only upon the fleece. Judges 6:39. 
For zt was dry upon the fleece only. Judges 6:40. 


CoH AGE Dour DOTeniy. 


DISTRIBUTIVE PHRASING 


To overcome certain difficulties inherent in rendering the 
original tongues into English the translators frequently 
resorted to devices here grouped under the general head of 
distributive phrasing. What is meant by distributive phras- 
ing becomes clear on comparing the use of the Latin distribu- 
tive numeral sewguli (one by one), as found in the Vulgate, 
with the device employed to render the same idea in the King 
James Version. The Vulgate translates Gen. 44:11, ‘‘Itaque 
festinato deponentes in terram saccos aperuerunt singuli.” 
The English Bible has, ‘‘Then ¢hey speedily took down every 
man his sack.” Here the pronoun ¢key conveys the plural 
significance of the ending z of szwguli, while every man his 
conveys the distributive sense of the word itself. This kind 
of distribution and several other kinds more or less related to 
it are illustrated below: 


Abide ye every man in his place. Ex. 16:29. 

Then the mariners were afraid and cried every man unto 
his god. Jonah 1:5. 

Take ye every man his censer and put incense in them, 
and bring ye before the Lord every man his censez, two 
hundred and fifty censers; thou also, and Aaron, each of 
you his censer. 

And they took every man his censer and put fire in 
them. Num. 16:17, 18. 


While the use of every man his in apposition with a plural 
is not exactly redundant when considered from the point of 
view of distribution, it is nevertheless closely akin to the 
redundant use of the pronoun as in, 

Joshua the son of Nun, which standeth before thee, he 
shall go in thither. Deut. 1:38. 
Here the use of the pronoun is resumptive of the force of 
the subject and is necessitated by the clause inserted between 


Syntax of the King James Version 15 


the subject and its verb. The lack of suspensive power 
necessitates the distribution of the subject force between 
Joshua and he. Examples are numerous: 
And the coney because he cheweth the cud but divideth 
not the hoof, #e is unclean unto you. Lev. 11:5. 
And the man whose hair is fallen off his head, he is bald; 
yet heis clean. Lev. 13:40. 
The insertion of this apparently redundant pronoun serves 
to emphasize the subject and make it perfectly unmistakable. 
Therefore Adam found it very convenient in shirking the 
blame to say: 
The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave 
me of the tree. Gen. 3:12. 

No doubt this distribution of the subject’s function 
between the real subject and a pronoun seemed to the trans- 
lators to add emphasis enough to justify the redundancy: 

_ Ye shall not fear them for the Lord, your God, he shall 
fight for you. Deut. 3:22. 
The Lord thy God, #e will go over before thee, and he 
will destroy these nations from before thee and thou 
shalt possess them: and Joshua fe shall go over before 
thee, as the Lord hath said. Deut. 31:3. 
In these cases “he Lord thy God is almost exclamatory while 
the redundant pronoun functions in its stead in the sentence. 
The result is more emphatic than if the Lord thy God were 
simply subject of the sentence. 


Pronouns are used redundantly in other cases with complete 
justification on account of the difficulty of translating from a 
highly inflected language, with comparatively free word 
order, into one of no inflections and rigid word order. In 
these instances the different case forms of the pronoun make 
the relation clear in a way that the noun could not for lack 
of declension: 

For all the wells which his father’s servants had digged 
in the days of Abraham, his father, the Philistines had 
stopped ¢hem and filled them with earth. Gen. 26:15. 

And the leper in whom the plague is, As clothes shall 


16 James Moses Grainger 


be rent and his forehead bare. Lev. 13:45. 

In this sentence defer could not be made possessive without 

necessitating an awkward construction. 
And upon ¢hem that are left alive of you, I will send a 
faintness into ¢hezr hearts. Lev. 26:36. 
Frequently the redundant element is an adverb, a phrase, or 
a whole clause, The principle is the same. 

In the cases quoted so far the redundant pronoun has a def- 
inite function in the sentence while its antecedent stands in a 
kind of exclamatory relation to the whole, but still without 
altogether forfeiting its functional relation. Many cases 
occur where this order is reversed so that while the antece- 
dent has a definite function in the sentence, the pronoun 
statids independent. It is introduced thus in order to tack on 
to it something which relates to the antecedent, but which if 
placed beside the antecedent would make a cumbersome con- 
struction: 

Thou shalt rejoice, ¢how and thine household and the 
Levite that is within thy gates. Dent. 14:26. 

For the Lord thy God hath chosen him out of all thy 
tribes to stand to minister in the name of the Lord, zm 
and his sons forever. Deut. 18:5. 

And he stood by his burnt sacrifice, Ae and all the princes 
of Moab. Num. 23:6. 

Such usages as those just mentioned were tiecessitated by 
the comparative rigidness of the word order in English due 
to the lack of inflections. Yet Bible English varies the word 
order with more freedom than current English does today. 
It is well, here, to notice the distributive manner of grouping 
series of modifiers. When a noun has a number of modifiers, 
one or two of them are sometimes placed before and the rest 
after it: 

O foolish people and unwise. Deut. 32:6. 

I knew that thou art a gracious God and merciful, slow 
to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest thee of the 
evil. Jonah 4:2. 

And thou shalt command the children of Israel that they 
shall bring pure ozl, olive, beaten, for the light, to cause 
the lamp to burn always. Ex. 27:20. 


Studies in Philology will be issued from time to time under 
the direction of the Philological Club of the University of 
North Carolina, The exchange of similar publications will he 
‘appreciated, 

Very Respectfully, 
Louis R. Wison, 
Permanent Secretary Philological Club, 


Chapel Hill, N.C, 


Syntax of the King James Version 17 


Occasionally even a compound subject is divided and grouped 
around its predicate: 
Aaron shall come and his sons. Num. 4:5. 


The distribution of the word éoward is also interesting: 
Be thou for the people fo God-ward. Ex. 18:19. 
Even éo the mercy seat-ward were the faces of the Cheru- 
bimt./h x. 13729. 


Descriptive distribution or repetition for picturesqueness is 

well shown by: 
And beneath upon the hem of it thou shalt make pome- 
granates of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, round 
about the hem thereof; and bells of gold between them 
round about: A golden belland a pomegranate, a golden 
bell and a pomegranate, upon the hem of the robe round 
about. Ex. 28:33. 


Phrasing with distributive intent sometimes appears to vio- 
late the rule of numerical concord. Thus Lu. 22:31: 
Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you 
that he might sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for 
thee that thy faith fail not. 


Here you the plural pronoun is used exactly in the sense of 
the Southern you all while the singular thee refers especially 
to Peter. Satan had desired to have them all, but Peter 
especially on account of his bitter trial was in danger of los- 
ing faith. A similar case isin John 14:9: 

Have I been so long time with you and yet hast thou not 

known me Philip? 
This kind of distribution, however, by no means explains all 
the violations of concord in number even in the prononn of 
the second person. In the laws of Moses we very often find a 
number of commands grouped together under one head. In 
the first general command or prohibition the plural of the 
pronoun is used while in the specific commands under the 
general heading, the singular is used: 

Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: ¢how shalt 

not respect the person of the poor nor honor the person of 


18 James Moses Grainger 


the mighty; but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy 
neighbor. Lev. 19:15. 
The following verses, 16, 17, 18, have chou and thy in specific 
commands under the general one above. 
Ye shall keep my statutes. 7/ow shalt not let thy cattle 
gender with a diverse kind; ¢ow shalt not sow thy field 
with mingledseed. Ibid:19. 
Furthermore Moses seems to think of the people, Israel, at 
one time as one person, Jacob, and again as many persons, 
Israel, and varies the number of his pronouns accordingly. 
English of today lacks this kind of distributive power on 
account of the loss of the distinction between the singular 
and plural of the pronouns of the second person and by its 
rigid adherence to the principle of concord. 

The distributive phrasing treated above is of three general 
types: (1) that causing apparent redundancy, chiefly of 
pronouns, and due to lack of inflection, necessitating rigid 
word order; (2) distributive word order contrary to ordi- 
nary practice in English; (3) distribution embracing appar- 
ent violation of the rules of concord as recognized today. 
To these should be added a fourth type treated below under 
the subject of distributive do-forms, in which a form of the 
auxiliary do is introduced to share the burden of relations 
laid upon the verb. This distributive tendency is due partly 
to the genius of the original languages which the translators 
strove to transliterate as precisely as possible, and partly to 
the aims of the work. All four types of distribution consti- 
tute a positive advantage to Bible English in contributing to 
its easy intelligibility, emphasis, beauty, and dignity. 


Cyliiamie bakit al ay 


Do-Forms 


The remark that the King James Version represents tran- 
sition syntax is perfectly exemplified in the use of do-forms. 
For the Bible shows every variety of the use of do as an aux- 
iliary, from the original half auxiliary do as a ‘‘pro-verb” 
down to emphatic do, which is the latest development of it. 
Furthermore, the Bible employs do in auxiliary senses peculiar 
to itself, grouped below under the head of Dzestrzbutive do. 
The different usages are treated here approximately in the 
order in which they came into the language, according to the 
outline of their development given in sections 2172 to 2195 of 
Sweet’s Wew /inglish Grammar. The remarkable scarcity 
of the purely emphatic do in the Bible, however, by the side 
of plenteous examples of do in negations, necessitates the 
explanation of the presence of do in negations on other 
grounds than emphasis, which Mr. Sweet accepts as the 
reason for this use of do. Do wasused with negatives before 
it was used for emphasis. In the examples given below it 
will be seen that the use of do-forms in the Bible, besides 
exemplifying transitional syntax, illustrates the continual 
effort on the part of the translators to attain a clearness, 
impressiveness, and dignity which would adapt the work to 
reading aloud to the people. The order of treatment here is: 


I. Do asa ‘‘pro-verb.” 
IJ. Mo as an auxiliary. 
III. Emphatic do. 


| (1.) In inversions. 

IV. Distributive do | (2.) With certain adverbs. 
| (3.) With negatives. 

I. Doasa ‘‘pro-verb.” 

Do is sometimes used as a ‘‘pro-verb” to avoid repetition 


of an antecedent verb: 


20 James Moses Grainger 


Then he shall minister in the name of the Lord his God, 
as all his brethren the Levites do. Deut. 18:7, 

Here do, being supplied by the translator, is in Italics. 
Lest peradventure he die also, as his brethren dd. Gen. 
38:11. (did in Italics). 
Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send 
forth a stinking savor: so doth a little folly him that is 
in reputation for wisdom and honor. Eccl. 10:1. (doth 
in Italics). 

Occasionally the ‘‘pro-verb” does not reproduce the full 
transitive significance of the antecedent verb: 

And we utterly destroyed them, as we dzd unto Sihon. 
Pewttns36. 

An anticipative ‘‘pro-verb” in imperative sentences similar 
to that ‘‘found in Transition and Early Middle English,” 
(Sweet 2173) appears occasionally in the Bible. 

This do: Take your censers, Korah, and all his com- 
pany. Num. 16:6. 

As ye do the heave offering of the threshing floor, so 
shall ye heave it (the cake of dough). Num. 15:20. 

II. Doas an auxiliary. 

Do is used frequently as an auxiliary with other verbs (1) 
for clearness in distinguishing tenses, (2) for convenience of 
form, (3) for euphony or rhythm, dignity or impressiveness, 
and (4) for no apparent reason but merely asa matter of 
Caprice. 

(1) Do used for clearness tn distinguishing tenses. 

Probably the most important auxiliary use of do is in the 
formation of the past tense of verbs whose past form was not 
clearly distinct in sound from the present. This function of 
do has been overlooked by the philologians. The most strik- 
ing case is that of eat whose past is dz7d eat in all but three 
cases. Other pasts formed with dd for clearness are did set, 
did put, did spit, did beat, did cast, did bear, did swear, did 
offer. With weak verbs this usage is commonest with those 
ending in -¢ or -d where the addition of -ed would cause an 
unpleasant repetition of ¢-sounds, e.g.: ded separate, did mete. 


Syntax of the King James Version 21 


She took the fruit thereof and dd cal, and gave also unto 
her husband with her and he dd eat. Gen. 3:6. 

As they did eat. Matt. 26:21. 

Therefore they ded set over them taskmasters. TEx. 1:11. 
And Jacob did separate the lambs. Gen. 30:40. 

For my vesture they dd cast lots. John 19:24. 

And they dzd beat the gold into thin plates and cut it 
into wires. Ex. 29:3. 


(2) Do used for convenience of form. 


In the second person singular of the past tense such verbs as 
anoint and depart had very awkward forms which were 
avoided by using dzdst with the infinitive. 

As thou dzdst anoint their father. Ex. 40:15. (to avoid 
anotintedst). 
From the day that thou dzdst depart out of the land of 
Egypt. Deut. 9:7. 
Didst depart is better than departedst, easier to speak and 
more euphonious. Yet this usage was not at all uniform, e. g.: 
Wherefore Jassedst thou over to fight against the chil- 
dren of Ammon, and dzds¢ not call us to go with thee? 
Judges 12:1. 


(3) Do used for euphony, rhythm, dignity, or impressiveness: 


A gift doth blind the eyes of the wise and pervert the 
words of the righteous. Deut, 16:19. 

When all the workers of iniquity do flourish. Psalm 92:7. 
I, the Lord, do sanctify him. Lev. 21:15, 16, 23. 

And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon 
tereaten. 1) Geu.6: 7. 

I do set my bow in the cloud. Gen. 9:13. 


(4) Capricious use of do: 


Andthey . . . didspztupon him. Mk. 15:19, 

And they sfz/ upon him. Matt. 27:30. 

Iam among you as he that serveth. Lu. 22:27. 

And he that it is chief as he that doth serve, Iu. 22:26, 


29 James Moses Grainger 


Ill. “Lmphatic Do. 


While it is clear that three or four uses of the do-forms last 
mentioned are in emphatic connections, the purely emphatic 
do in the modern sense, where special vocal stress is given 
the form of do and not the principal verb, is very rare in the 
King James Version. The difficulty in determining whether 
do should really be stressed probably adds to the difficulty of 
discovering examples of this purely emphatic do: ; 


And the Lord said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah 
laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child which am 
old? 

Then Sarah denied, saying, I laughed not; for she was 
afraid. And he said, Nay; but thou dzds/ laugh. Gen. 
18:13-15. 

But thou shalt remember the Lord thy God: . . . And 
it shall be if thou do at all forget the Lord thy God. 
Deut. 8:18, 19. 


An emphatic use of do akin to the auxiliary use of it to 
distinguish past from present tense is that in which the past 
character of the statement is emphasized, as in: 

In the year of the jubilee the field shall return to him of 
whom it was bought, even to him to whom the possession 
of the land dd belong (that, is before it was sold). Lev. 
27:24. 

For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, 
though I dd repent (did here implies ‘‘at one time”). 
2 Gor.) 7:8. 


IV. Distributive Do. 


The auxiliary do is used in many sentences where the verb 
is so burdened with relations that another verb is needed to 
Share the burden. The nature of the verb’s relations to other 
sentence-elements requires its position before some, after 
others.. When these related elements are multiplied in one 
sentence or the position of the verb is such that some modifier 
can not stand reasonably near its verb, the needed form of do 


Syntax of the King James Version 23 


is introduced so that the relations may be distributed between 
the main verb and the auxiliary do. Though this distributive 
use of do accounts for the modern use of do in questions, 
inhibitions, and with negatives, it has not received considera- 
tion at the hands of philologians. The chief constructions 
in which this principle operates are (1) in inversions, (2) with 
certain adverbs, and (3) in negative sentences. 


(1) Do 7“ inversions. 


Mere inversion alone seldom justifies the introduction of a 
do-form, but when adverbs appear in the inverted sentences 
do-forms are used. .In the question, ‘‘Seest thou a man dili- 
gent in business?” Prov. 22:29, the verb can sustain its two 
relations, viz., to subject and to object, just as well when at 
the head of the sentence as when in its usual position between 
subject and object. But in the question, ‘‘Requite ye thus 
the Lord?” a new element appears in the form of the adverb, 
thus, which also demands a place next to the verb. There- 
fore the translators split the verb in two by introducing do at 
the head of the sentence to effect the inversion, and placed 
subject, adverb, and object, each in its natural position relative 
to the main verb, reguzte, thus: ‘‘Do ye thus requite the Lord, 
O foolish people and unwise?” Deut. 32:6. Occasionally an 
ambiguity that would arise in an inverted sentence for lack 
of case forms of nouns was avoided by using do to effect the 
inversion, so that subject and object might stand respectively 
before and after the verb, as in, ‘‘Doth Job fear God for 
naught?” Job1:9. But even in such cases an adverb is 
usually present as here. Practically everywhere that do 
occurs in inverions some distributive aim is evident, and 
usually the distribution is necessitated by the presence of an 
adverb or its equivalent. 


(a) Do-forms in sentences inverted by adverbs at the beginning. 


Here the verb is usually transitive and is followed by its 
object: 
Onto Adam also and his wife did the Lord make coats of 
Skin Gens ai21- 


24 James Moses Grainger 


And from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad. Gen. 
o393 

Thus did he make for all the boards of the tabernacle. 
Ex. 36:22. 

Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail. Gen. 7:20. 
Of my hand didst thou require it. Gen. 31:39. 

And he put the mitre upon his head; also upon the mitre 
even upon his forefront did he put the golden front. Lev. 
eee 


The negative conjunctions nezther and nor treated below 
under the head of Do tu negative sentences require do in 
the inversion just as adverbs at the beginning do. 


(6) Do-forms in sentences beginning with other elements 
than subject: 


The noise of them that sing do. hear. Ex. 32:18. 


(c) Do-forms in questions. 


Whenever do is used in questions some adverb or equivalent 
is present, which necessitates a distribution of the verb: 


Do ye look on things after the outward appearance? 
2 Cor. 10:7. 

Did ever people hear the voice of God? Deut. 4:33. 
Why do ye look one upon another? Gen. 42:1. 

Why dost thou ask Abishag the Shumanite for Adonijah? 
1 Kings 2:22. 

Why ddst thou xoZ tell me that she was thy wife? Why 
saidst thou, she is my sister? Gen. 12:18, 19. 

If thou sayest, behold, we knew it not; doth not he that 
pondereth the heart consider it? aud he that keepeth thy 
soul, doth not he know it? Prov. 24:12. 

*Doth Job fear God for naught? Job 1:9. 

*Do ye not know their tokens? Ibid 21:29, 

*Do ye now believe? John 16:31. 


* Quoted in Smith’s Studies in Suxtac. 


bo 
Or 


Syntax of the King James Version 


(d) Do-forms in imperatives. 


The only kind of imperative sentences in which do is used 
commonly to effect the inversion is the inhibition. The neg- 
ative is merely the adverb which produces the demand for 
the do-form. Here the practice is less regular and operates 
only in the presence of an object or another adverb, though 
with certain verbs not at all: 

Do noi sin against the child. Gen. 42:22. 

Do not drink wine or strong drink. Lev. 10:9. 

Let zot your hearts be faint, fear not, and do not tremble, 
neither be ye terrified because of them. Deut. 20:3. 

Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. 
John 5:45. 


In the following command the adverbial phrases require a do- 
form: 
And do ye abide w7thout the camp seven days. Num. 
o1s19, 


(2) Dowzth certain adverbs. 


Some adverbs must stand next to the verb and yet will make 
an awkward sentence if placed between either subject and 
verb or verb and object. In such acase the verb is split in 
two by introducing a form of do. The adverb is placed 
between the do-form and the verb proper. 

And if the people of the land do anyways hide their eyes 
fromthe man . . . then I will even set my face 
against that soul. Lev. 20:4. 

Therefore is the name of it called Babel because the Lord 
did there confound the language of all the earth. 
Gens 11:9. 


The adverb most commonly used in this fashion is the neg- 
ative voz. Its influence in bringing do into negative sen- 
tences is treated below. 


(3) Dozn negative sentences. 


The negative words, zezther, nor, and not, in sentences, call 
for do-forms on no other ground than as adverbs, As stated 


26 James Moses Grainger 


above nezther or nor at the beginning of a sentence produces 
inversion and demands a do-form under the same considera- 
tions that any sentence element other than the subject, at the 
beginning of a sentence, does. Likewise of is an adverb 
which can not well stand either between subject and its verb 
or betweem verb and its object. For this reason the presence 
of woz¢ in a sentence requires a do-form, so that of may stand 
between the auxiliary and the main verb and not interfere 
with the juxtaposition of either subject or object to the verb. 
Furthermore, it was noticed above that in inversions mo/ oper- 
ates precisely like any other adverb in bringing do-forms into 
interrogative and imperative sentences. ‘This would seem to 
indicate that do was used in negative sentences not for 
emphasis primarily, but to afford a two-part verb upon which 
to distribute the relations of the other sentence elements. 


(a) Do wth neither (nor). 


Nether standing at the head of a sentence was followed by 
a do-form only when the verb had an object or was modified: 
Neither did he set his heart to this also. Ex. 7:23. 
Nevther with you only dol make this covenant. Deut. 
29314. 
Newher did he acknowledge his brethren, nor knew his 
children. Deut. 33:9. 


(In the last clause the absence of an expressed subject simpli- 
fies matters so that the do-form is unnecessary.) 


Neither do men light a candle and put it under a 
bushel. |);Matt. (5:15, 

Thy raiment waxed not old upon thee, nether did thy 
foot swell, these forty years. Deut. 8:4. 


(b) Dowzth not. 


In the majority of negative sentences with do it will be 
found that the regular verb is already either modified or so 
fortified before and after by subject and object that the nega- 
tive cannot get at it. Therefore, in order to enable xoZ to 


Syntax of the King James Version 27 


stand next to the verb as it demands, the form of do is intro- 
duced and woz is placed between the auxiliary and the verb: 
The Lord dd not set his love upon you. Deut. 7:7. 
For they hated knowledge and dd not choose the fear of 
-the Lord. Prov. 1:29. 
Thou dost not enquire wisely concerning this. Eccl. 7:10. 
Kor though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the 
flesh. 2 Cor. 10:3. 


CoH VAS PICEA iy: 


RELATIVE PRONOUNS 


That, which, and who. 


The common relatives of Bible English are thai, which, and 
who. That occurs oftener than whzch and who both together; 
while who occurs least frequently of all. No rules, however, 
can be discovered which governed the use of these pronouns 
with even an approximate invariability. In fact it is exceed- 
ingly doubtful whether the translators themselves could dis- 
tinguish at all clearly between the three relatives in refer- 
ence, meaning, or usage. Who, of course, always refers to 
persons except in the case of whose, which, being the only 
form of possessive* relative, refers to both persons and things. 
That and which constantly refer to both persons and things. 
Though no marked regularity appears in the use of these 
pronouns certain general principles which were probably the 
result of unconscious habit, seem to be followed. To point 
out some of these tendencies, without even attempting to 
establish any fixed rules for the use of that, which, and who, 
is the object of the following discussion. 

The most general line of distinction between the relatives 
of the Bible is that which separates restrictive from non-re-— 
strictive relative pronouns. <A_ restrictive pronoun introduces 
a clause which simply places a limitation upon a general or 
generic antecedent without characterizing it particularly: 

To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, 
and between the beast ¢hat may be eaten and the beast 
that may not be eaten. Lev. 11:47. 


A non-restrictive, or progressive, pronoun does not restrict, 
but rather characterizes its antecedent: 


* Of which does not oecur with possessive significance. 


Syntax of the King James Version 29 
t Y 


Other sheep I have, whzch are not of this fold. John 
10:16. 


A still treer variety of non-restrictive relative, which occurs 
frequently in Bible English, neither restricts nor primarily 
characterizes the antecedent, but introduces a clause which 
logically bears on the whole sentence: 
How then shall Pharaoh hear me, who am of uncircum- 
cised lips? Ex. 6:12. 


That, which, and who all appear in both restrictive and non- 
restrictive senses. 7ha/, however, is used restrictively so 
much oftener than whzch and who, that it may be considered 
the usual restrictive relative. When ¢aZ is used in a non-re- 
strictive sense, some special circumstance, such as a pronom- 
inal antecedent, will usually be found to have permitted its 
use. 

Which, though actually occurring nearly as often in restric- 
tive as in non-restrictive clauses, may be considered the usual 
non-restrictive relative of characterization, because its substi- 
tution for ¢kat in restrictive clauses is usually due to some 
particular circumstance which prevents the use of ¢hat. 

Who, especially in the nominative, often introduces clauses 
which either are codrdinate with the main clause, or logically 
modify the whole sentence rather than the antecedent of the 
pronoun itself. It may often be replaced by a conjunction 
and a personal pronoun with an obvious improvement of the 
sense. Therefore who has much the nature of a conjunction- 
pronoun and is the least restrictive and the most progressive 
of all three relatives. 


ee AT: 


That appears as arelative pronoun in Bible English in 
restrictive sense four or five times as often as non-restric- 
tively. 

1. That Restrictive: 


Art thou the man ¢Aa/ spakest unto the woman. Judges 
13:1 


30 James Moses Grainger 


(a) after generic antecedents: 


Because of its predilection for restrictive usage, ¢hat natur- 
ally assumed the position of relative after such generic and 
indefinite antecedents as a//, every, any, anything, some, none, 
the day, the time. ‘This is one of its most common uses, 
though which and who also occur occasionally after such 
words: 

And Abraham took Ishmael his son and all ¢hat were 
born in his house and all ¢hat were bought with his 
money. Gen. 17:23. 

I will not take anything /hat is thine. Gen. 14°23. 

In the day that God created man. Gen, 5:1. 

Even at the éme that women go out to draw water. Gen. 
24:11. 

There was xo man that would know me. Ps. 142:4. 

Or compare ourselves with some that commend them- 
selves. 2 Cor. 10:12. 


Exceptions occur: 


And they took them wives of all whzch they chose. Gen. 
6:2. 

Usually such exceptions can be accounted for by the special 
conditions which enable some other relative to assume the 
place of ¢hat as in: 

Nothing will be restrained from them whzch they have 
imagined todo. Gen. 11:6. 
Here which is introduced because of its greater carrying 
power, the relative being too far separated from its anteced- 
ent, zothing, to allow that. 
For the children of Israel walked forty years in the 
wilderness till a// the people ¢hat were men of war, which 
came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed 
not the voice of the Lord: unto whom the Lord sware 
that he would not show them the land. Joshua 5:6. 
Herein the second clause which replaces that because of 
separation and in the last clause ¢hat¢ could not be used after 
the preposition wzfo even if the separation did not require 


Syntax of the King James Version 31 


some more suspensive relative and the clause were not really 
coérdinate. 


(b) after demonstrative or personal pronoun antecedents: 


Likewise when the antecedent is a demonstrative or per- 
sonal pronoun the relative usually becomes ¢hat unless some 
special reason intervenes to give the place to which or who. 

It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither 
is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome: but the 
noise of them that sing do I hear. Ex. 32:18. 

This is z¢ that belongeth unto the Levites. Num. 8:24. 
He shall gently lead those that are with young. Is. 40:11. 
What is ¢#zs that thou hast done unto us? Judges 15:11. 
They that are thrust through in her streets. Jer. 51:4. 
What part hath fe that believeth with an infidel? 2 Cor. 
6:15. 


Exceptions : 


When a personal pronoun or a demonstrative antecedent is 
followed by other relative than ¢ha/ the reason for the substi- 
tution is usually evident, the substitution being due usually 
to some such particular circumstance as separation of the pro- 
noun from the antecedent, which usually demands which on 
account of its greater power to bridge over the gap. Some- 
times when a special circumstance requires a relative with a 
different form for the objective case whom is used, as after a 
preposition: 

It was little whzch thou hadst before I came. Gen. 30:30. 
Here the separation of antecedent and relative necessitates a 
relative of greater carrying power than /hat. So in: 

It shall be well with them that fear God, which fear 

before him. Eccl. 8:12. 

And the vessel of earth that fe toucheth wfzch hath an 

issue shall be broken. Lev. 15:7. 

He with whom it is found shall be my servant. Gen. 

44:10. 

For not he that commendeth himself is approved but 

whom the Lord commendeth. 2 Cor. 10:18, 


32 James Moses Grainger 


They were more which died with hailstones than they 
whom the children of Israel slew with the sword. 
Joshua 10:11. 


Whom may be used here to avoid excessive alliteration: 
than they that the. 


Sometimes which seems to be used instead of that to:avoid 
repetition of ¢hat in different senses in the same sentence. 
Compare : 
The same (river) is 7 ‘hat compasseth the whole land of 
Ethiopia. Gen. 2:13. 
That (river) is z# which goeth toward the east of Assy- 
TidcsnGrety 2.14, 
This is obviously one reason for using which so commonly 
after that in that which meaning what, instead of that that, a 
construction which was formerly more frequent than in Bible 
times: 
Besides those things ¢hat are without, that which cometh 
upon me daily, the care of the churches. 2 Cor. 11:28. 
And God granted him that which he requested. 1 Chron. 
42103 
Bake that which ye will bake today. Ex. 16:23. 
Examples of that that are rare: 
I will pay ¢hat that I have vowed. Jonah 2:9. 
Besides ¢hat that his hand shall get. Num. 6:21. 


2. That omztted: 
And he knew not ought he had save the bread. Gen. 39:6. 


Sometimes the relative ¢hat is omitted apparently to avoid 
repetition in different senses: 

God doth know /hat in the day ye eat thereof, then your 

eyes shall be opened.’ Gen. 3:5. 

In that day thou seest my face thou shalt die. Ex. 10:28. 
3. That wth antecedent omitted: 

Sometimes ¢hat is used to introduce a relative clause with- 
out an expressed antecedent, usually in the sense of al/ that, 
(what) : 

Have ye called us to take ‘hat we have? Judges 14:15, 


Syntax of the King James Version 33 


And sent over ¢hat he had. Gen. 32:23. 

Keep ¢hai thou hast unto thyself. Gen. 33:9. 

According to ¢hat he hath done. 2 Cor. 5:10. 
It is doubtful, however, whether ¢Aaz in these cases is really 
the relative or the demonstrative. Evidence seems to favor 
the latter, e. g.: 

Bake that which ye will bake today and seethe ‘hat ye 

willseethe. Ex. 16:23. 
Here the word omitted is evidently the relative which. That 
_in the instances given above therefore may be the demon- 
strative pronoun performing the joint function of relative 
and demonstrative in é76 xowod, Yet instances occur occasion- 
ally of the demonstrative ¢hat followed by the relative that 
(see above); and the relative omitted in the following is evi- 
dently that: 

God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your 

eyes Shall be opened. Gen. 3:5. 
That is the regular relative pronoun after day. 


4, That with antecedent implied: 


For also there is /hat neither day nor night seeth sleep 
with hiseyes. Eccl. 8:16. 

Thou shalt deliver it unto him by ¢hat the sun goeth 
down. Ex. 22:26. (antecedent implied = the time). 


5. That with posseesive antecedent: 
According to zs ability ‘hat vowed shall the priest value 
him. Lev. 27:8. 
Water to wash zs feet and the men’s feet that were with 
him. Gen. 24:32, 
I did it not for Azs cause thai had done the wrong, nor for 
his cause that suffered wrong. 2 Cor. 7:12, 


6. That wth prepositions: 


Though the form, //at, represents both nxomznative and 
objective cases, it seldom appears with prepositions, probably 
because of its tendency to follow immediately upon its ante- 
cedent. Wherever ¢hat is governed by a preposition, the 


34 James Moses Grainger 


preposition has dropped to the end of the clause and become 

practically a part of the verb: 
Every place that the sole of your feet shall tread upon, 
that have I given unto you. Joshua 1:3. 
Whatsoever uncleanness it be ‘haf a man shall be defiled 
withal. Wey. 5:3, 
He shall give again the price of his redemption out of 
the money ¢hat he was bought for. Lev. 25:51. 
For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh 
unto them as the Lord our God is in all things that we 
call upon him for. Deut. 4:7. 

One example occurs of that with a preposition before it: 

Thou shalt deliver it unto him dy that the sun goeth 
down. Ex. 22:26. 


Il.’: WuHiIc#. 


Which, though often used restrictively in place of that 
when desirable, appears most commonly in simple non-restric- 
tive clauses expressing some characteristic of the antecedent. 
It refers to both persons and things; but as who refers only 
to persons, except in the possessive whose, which has a 
neuter antecedent oftener than either other relative. In 
English of today who has occupied the gap left by which 
when tne latter relinguished its power to refer to persons. 


1. Which as the relative of charactertstic: 


Our Father, whzch art in heaven. Matt. 6:9. 

Arise, take thy wife and thy two daughters, which are 
here;))'\Gen: 19°15; 

And the Lord delivered Lachish into the hand of Israel, 
which took it on the second day. Joshua 10:32. 

But thanks be to God whzch put the same earnest care 
into the heart of Titus for you. 2 Cor. 8:16. 

And Judas Iscariot, which also betrayed him. Mark 3:19. 
And made him to ride in the second chariot which he 
had. Gen. 41:43. 

In the vale of Siddim which is the salt sea. Gen. 14:3. 


(Se) 
Or 


Syntax of the King James Version 


2. Carrying power of which. 


Which is often used in restrictive sense where ¢hat might be 
expected, though usually under circumstances and for rea- 
sons that hinder the use of tha’. Thatis seldom used even in 
restrictive clauses, when the antecedent is separated from 
the relative pronoun. Which has a greater power to bridge 
over words intervening between the antecedent and itself. 
Many examples illustrate this: 

And the Lord thy God will put all these curses upon 
thine enemies and on them that hate thee, whzch perse- 
cuted thee. Deut. 30:7, 
And they buried him in a hill ¢hat pertained to Phinehas 
his son, whzch was given him in mount Ephraim. Joshua 
24:33. 
Other sheep I have, whzch are not of this fold. John 
10:16. 
Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man; preserve me from 
the violent man; which imagine mischiefs in their heart. 
Psalm 140:1-2. 
The plural in the relative clause shows that w/hzch refers 
back to ‘‘the evil man” as well as to ‘‘the violent man.” 


3. Which and that overlapping: 


Which in the restrictive sense is not limited, however, to 
clauses where separation from the antecedent requires it. It 
often occurs where every circumstance would seem to require 
that, if any rule were followed invariably: 

So all the czties which ye shall give to the Levites shall 
be forty and eight. Num. 35:1. 

I shall bewail many which have sinned already. 2 Cor. 
12:21. 

He which soweth sparingly shall reap sparingly and he 
which soweth bountifully shall reap  bountifully. 2 
Cor. 9:6. 

From them whzch desire occasion, 2 Cor. 11:12. 


And so notably many other cases in the writings of Paul. 


36 James Moses Grainger 


And gave change of garment unto ‘hem which expounded 
the riddle. (Late ¢hose who). Judges 14:19. 


That occasionally usurps places usually reserved for whzch: 


Hear, I'pray you, this dream, which I have dreamed. 
Gen. 37:6. 

What is this‘dream ¢ka/ thou hast dreamed. Gen. 37:10. 
The Lord God of heaven which took me from my father’s 
house and from the land of my kindred, and whzch spake 
unto me, and ¢kat sware unto me saying—. Gen. 24:7, 


4, That which. 


That which has almost completely supplanted that that in 
Bible English, while whad in this sense barely shows a trace 
of the tendency by which today it has nearly displaced ¢hat 
which. That occurs in the sense of our relative what. ‘The 
following examples show the usage in the King James Version: 


(a) that that =\that which: 


I will pay that that | have vowed. Jonah 2:9. 
Beside that that his hand shall get. Num. 6:21. 


(b) that= that which: 


According to that a man hath and not according to that 

he hath not. 2 Cor. 8:12. 

And sent over that he had. Gen. 32:23. 

Bake that which ye will bake today and seethe ‘hat ye 

will seeth. Ex. 16:23. 

But now I forbear lest any man should think of me above . 
that which he seeth me to be, or ¢hat he heareth of me. 

2 Cor. 12:6. 


(c) that which: 


And God granted that which he requested, 1 Chron. 4:10. 
That which was from the beginning, which we have 


Syntax of the King James Version 37 


heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have 
looked upon. 1 John 1:1. 
A time to plant and a time to pluck up that which is 
planted. Eccl. 3:2. 
The tendency is to have which follow that immediately: 
witness the dropping of prepositions to the end of clauses, 
as in: 
Until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of. 
Gen. 28:15. 
But juxtaposition is by no means requisite: 
All that about which he has sworn falsely. Lev. 6:5. 
Let that therefore abide in you whzch ye have heard from 
the beginning. 1 John 2:24. 


(d) what=that which: 


What as the equivalent of ¢hat which occurs occasionally 
though usually with a suggestion of indirect interrogation. 
God hath showed Pharaoh what he is about to do, 
Gen. 41:25. 
But what they kuow naturally, as brute beasts, in those 
things they corrupt themselves. Jude 1:10. 


5. Which wzth prepositions: 


The suspensive or carrying power of whzc? naturally enabled 
it to substitute for ‘rat. Which, however, is never used with 
a preposition unless the antecedent is neuter; otherwise 
whom is used: 

And he called their names after the names by which his 
father had called them. Gen. 26:18. 
Thou hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee, 
saying.) Gen. 3:17. 
But the tendency of prepositions to drop to the end of their 
relative clauses is quite independent of the pronoun used. 
Of is the preposition most commonly dropped to the end of 
the clause, though any preposition may drop: 
And they came to the place whch God had told hiin of, 
Gen. 22:9, 


38 James Moses Grainger 


This is the fashion whch thou shalt make it of 

Gen: 6:15. 

Moreover he will bring upon thee all the diseases of 

Egypt, which thou wast afraid of. Deut. 28:60. 

Which we have looked wfon. 1 John 1:1. 

They turned quickly out of the way wh7ch their fathers 

walked 2. Judges 2:17 
6. <Adverbial substitute for which with prepositions. 

Adverbial substitutes for which with prepositions occur in 

great variety in the Bible. They are for the most part com- 
binations of the conjunction where with various prepositions. 
The chief ones are wherewith and withal for with which, 
whereby for by which, whereof for of which, whereinto, where- 
unto, whither, from whence, when, whereon, whereupon, 
wherein, where, wherefore. 


7. Which omztt[ed: 


The tribe of Danites sought them an inheritance to 
dwellin. Judges 18:1. 
And put water there to wash withal. Ex. 40:30. 


8. Thewhich. 


In Bible English the which occurs almost exclusively after 
prepositions: 

J have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon 
the face of the earth, and every tree zz the which is the. 
fruit of a tree yielding seed. Gen. 1:29. (vs. 30 uses 
wherein). 
I will not destroy the city for the which thou hast 
spoken. ‘Gen. 19:21. ; 
He overthrew the cities zz the which Lot dwelt. Gen. 
LOZ. 
By the way cz the which ye go. Gen. 42:38. 
Yet are there five years 7m the which there shall be nei- 
ther earing nor harvest. Gen. 45:6. 
And I will bring you unto the land concerning the which 
I did swear. Ex. 6:8. 





Syntax of the King James Version 39 


Until the days be fulfilled cz the which he separated him- 
self unto the Lord. Num. 6:5. 

Thou hast had pity on the gourd for the which thou hast 
not laboured, neither madest it grow; whch came up in 
a night. Jonah 4:10. 


9, Which wth antecedent in possessive. 


Which sometimes has for its antecedent a possessive noun 
or pronoun: 
For the ¢ruth’s sake, which dwelleth in us. 2 John 1:2. 
Abram called his son’s name, whzch Hagar bare, Ish- 
mae iATer. 62 US, 
And by thezy prayer for you, whzch long after you for the 
exceeding grace of God in you. 2 Cor. 9:14. 


10. Which wsed to refer to whole sentences or sentence members: 


Which is the only relative pronoun used in the Bible to 
refer to a whole sentence or sentence member as antecedent: 
And there came a fire out from before the Lord and con- 
sumed upon the alaar the burnt offering and the fat: 
which, when all the people saw, they shouted and fell on 
their faces. Lev. 9:24. 
And they shall fill thy houses, and the houses of all thy 
servants, and the houses of all the Egyptians; whzch 
neither thy fathers nor thy fathers’ fathers have seen 
since the day that they were upon the earth unto this 
day. Ex. 10:6. 
Neither shalt thou set thee up any image, wh7ch the 
Lord thy God hateth. Deut. 16:22. 
The dust is turned into lice, whzch the magicians could 
not do. Heading to Ex, 8. 


11. Which as arelative adjective. 


Which, alone of the relative pronouns, occurs occasionally 
as a relative adjective modifying sometimes (a) a preceding 
noun repeated, (b) a noun identical-in meaning with one 
preceding, or (c) a word which sums up the idea preceding. 


40 James Moses Grainger 


(a) With noun repeated: 


For unto this day remaineth the same vaz/ untaken 
away in the reading of the old testament; whzch vail is 
done away in Christ. 2 Cor, 3:14. 

From the river of Arnon unto mount Hermon, (which 
Hlermon the Sidonians call Sirion; and the Amorites call 
it Shenir.) Deut. 3:8-9. 

And the name of Hebron before was Kirjath-Avréa, 
which Arba was a great man among the Anakims. 
Joshua 14:15. 

For the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be 
done away. 2 Cor. 3:7, 

And they gave them the cty of Arba the father of 
Anak, which cityis Hebron. Joshua 21:11. Joshua 15:13. 


(b) With a noun identical in meaning with one preceding: 


Again a new commandment write 1 unto you, which 
thing is true in him and in you. 1 John 2:8. 


(c) With a word to sum up a preceding idea: 


And they were very wroth, because he had wrought 
folly in Israel in lying with Jacob’s daughter, which 
thing ought not to be done. Gen. 34:7. 
And all Israel went thither, a whoring after it; which 
thing became a snare unto Gideon. Judges 8:27. 
For all things are for your sakes, . . . for which 
cause we faint not. .2 Cor. 4:15-16. 
A faint analogy to the use of which as an adjective may be 

seen in the following example with what meaning at which: 
When that company died, what tzme the fire devoured 
two hundred and fifty men. Num. 26:10. 


Ill. Wuo. 


From the above discussion it appears that although ¢hat as 
a relative pronoun occurs more frequently than either whzch 
or who and is the chief restrictive relative, its sphere of 





Syntax of the King James Version 4] 


activities is more limited than theirs. Which, though used 
less often, frequently replaces /Aaz even in restrictive clauses, 
has greater freedom with regard to position on account of its 
greater carrying power, and is the usual progressive or non- 
restrictive relative pronoun. Who, as remains to be seen, 
though the least used of the three pronouns and though lim- 
ited to personal reference in which it seldom appears 
restrictively, commands a greater freedom in use and signifi- 
cance than either of the others. It frequently departs from 
the usual sphere of relative pronouns in English — the intro- 
duction of clauses which merely define or characterize the 
antecedent — and acquires the function of a conjunction with 
a demonstrative or personal pronoun, thus introducing 
clauses which bear logically on the whole sentence. Clauses 
thus introduced may be logically either coordinate with or 
subordinate to the main clause. In either case a marked 
improvement in sense may usually be noted by the modern 
ear, if a demonstrative or a personal pronoun with an appro- 
priate conjunction is substituted for the relative.* In this 
usage, as must be readily seen, who departs still further from 
the restrictive function of relative pronouns, and acquires a 
new field of activities. The use of who in current English 
does not approach the freedom which it exercises in the King 
James Version. 


1. Who as a conjunction-pronoun : 


(a) Egutvalent to a coordinate conjunction and a pronoun: 


And the Lord delivered them into the hand of Israel 
who smote them, and chased them into great Zidon, and 
into Misrephothmaim, and into the valley of Mispeh 
eastward; and they smote them, until they left them 
none remaining. Joshua 11:8. 


*“The awkwardness, or impossibility, of a literal translation (of many 
relative pronouns in Latin) may generally be relieved by the substitution 
of a demonstrative with an appropriate conjunction.’’ Gildersleeye’s Latin 
Grammar, Art, 610, R. 1. See Franz’s Shakespeare-Grammatik, Art. 206, 
rie doy 


42 James Moses Grainger 


In this sentence who is exactly parallel with and they 

below it. 
And he is the head of the body, the church; who is the 
beginning, the first born from the dead. Col. 1:18. 
She returned unto her father, who did with her accord- 
ing to his vow. Judges 11:39. 
And he shall bring them unto the priest, who shall offer 
that which is for the sin offering first. Lev. 5:8. 
For she had neither father nor mother, avd the mad 
was fair and beautiful; whom Mordecai, when her father 
and mother were dead, took for his own daughter. 
Esther 2:7. 
The watchmen that go about the city found me; /o 
whomIsaid. (towhom=andtothem) Songs 3:3. 
And Caleb said unto her, What wouldest thou? Who 
answered, Give me a blessing. (who=and she) Joshua 
15:18-19. 
But he himself turned again from the quarries that were 
by Gilgal, and said, I have a secret errand unto thee, O 
king: who said, Keep silence. (who=and he} Judges 
orl. 
How that they told you there should be mockers in the 
last time, who should walk after their own ungodly 
lusts. (who = and that they) Jude 1:18. 
(Lest) thou forget the Lord thy God which brought thee 
forth out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bon- 
dage, who led thee through that great and terrible wil- 
derness, wherein were fiery serpents and scorpions, and 
drought, where there was no water: who brought thee 
water out of the rock of flint: who fed thee in the wil- 
derness with manna. Deut. 8:14-15-16. 
He had thirty sons and thirty daughters, whom he sent 
abroad, avd took in thirty daughters for zs sons. Judges 
1239. . 
My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine 
house. (who=for he) Num. 12:7. 

In the following sentence who really has no place in its 
own clause except that of a conjunction: 


Syntax of the King James Version 435 


And they said unto them, Go, search, the land: who 
when they came to mount Ephraim to the home of 
Micah, ¢hey lodged there. Judges 18:2. 


(b) Agurvalent to a subordinate conjunction with a pronoun: 


Who is the relative pronoun usually employed after per- 
sonal antecedents when the relative clause conveys some such 
meaning aS cause, concession, or purpose, it being equiva- 
lent in such cases to some subordinate conjunction, such as 
because, since, seeing that, as, although, in order that, and 
a personal or demonstrative pronoun. In this use who serves 
somewhat the same function as the subjunctive mood serves 
in relative clauses in Latin;* and we find the distinction 
between clauses introduced by who and those introduced by 
which or that even less clearly drawn than the distinction 
between subjunctive and indicative relative clauses in Latin. 
Yet it seems evident that who at the head of a relative clause 
often gives its clause a peculiar prominence: 

Yea better is he than both they, which hath not yet 
been, who (because he) hath not seen the evil work that 
is under the sun. Eccl. 4:3. 
Here whzch merely defines the antecedent while wo explains 
the statement. 
And the people served the Lord all the days of Joshua 
and all the days of the elders that outlived Joshua, who 
(because they) had seen all the great works of the Lord 
that he did for Israel. Judges 2:7, 
I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who (because 
he) loveth to have the preeminence among them, 
receiveth us not. 3 John 1:9. 
But our sufficiency is of God, who (since he) also hath 
made us able ministers of the new testament. 2 Cor. 3:06. 


***A simple relative, introducing a merely descriptive fact, takes the indica- 
tive, as any demonstrative would do. , . . But many relative conjunc- 
tions take the subjunctive to indicate a closer logical connection between the 
relative clause and the main clause.’’ Allen and Greenough’s Latin Gran- 
mar, p, 339, 


44 James Moses Grainger 


And there builded he an altar unto the Lord who (be- 
cause he) appeared unto him. Gen. 12:7. 
Be merciful, O Lord, unto thy people Israel, whom thou 
hast redeemed. Deut. 21:8. 
(seeing thati suv ithe) 
And he sent messengers throughout all Manasseh; who 
(as it) also was gathered after him. Judges 6:35. 
And thou shalt speak unto all ¢hat are wise hearted, 
whom (since them) I have filled with the spirit of wis- 
dom. Ex. 28:3. ; 
Not as Cain, who (for he) was of that wicked one and 
slew his brother. 1 John 3:12. 
And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto 
Moses, whom (for him) the Lord knew face to face. 
Deut. 34:10. 
Even so thou knowest not the works of God who (for he) 
maketh all. Eccl. 11:5. 
There is none like unto the God of Jeshurun, who (for 
he) rideth upon the heaven in thy help. Deut. 33:26. 
And the children of Israel remembered not the Lord 
their God, who (although he) had delivered them out of 
the hands of all their enemies. Judges 8:34, 
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who (although 
he) knew no sin. 2 Cor. 5:21. 
He that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how 
can he love God whom he hath not seen. (whom= 
when him) 1 John 4:20. 
They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom 
(although them) they knew not, to new gods ¢hai came 
newly up, whom your fathers feared not. Deut. 32:17. 
Compare the use of whom and that above. 
This day will I begin to put the dread of thee and the 
fear of thee upon the nations ¢Aa/ are under the whole 
heaven, who (so that they) shall hear report of thee, 
and shall tremble, and be in anguish because of thee. 
Deut. 2425: 
Here ¢hat introduces a mere relative clause of characteristic, 
while wo introduces one expressing result. 


Syntax of the King James Version 45 


And the man Micah had an house of gods, and made an 
ephod and teraphim, and consecrated one of his sons, 
who became (that he might become) his priest. Judges 
iW 

I would lead thee and bring thee unto my mother’s 
house, who would (that she might) instruct me. Song's 
of Solomon 8:2. 

Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who 
(while they) dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and 
thirty years. Ex. 12:40. 

For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who (as he) was 
preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus 
and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was 
yea. 2 Cor. 1:19. 


In many cases, although it is difficult to give the exact 
equivalent of who in the form of a conjunction and pronoun, 
it is clear that the clause bears a more intimate logical con- 
nection with the sentence than the mere definition or char- 
acterization of the antecedent of the pronoun: 

Now I Paul myself beseech you by the meekness and 
gentleness of Christ, who in presence am base among 
you, but being absent am bold toward you. 2 Cor. 10:1. 
And so I saw the wicked buried, who had come and gone 
from the place of the holy. Eccl. 8:10. 

Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou 
lovest. Gen. 22:2. 

Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee, 
and by the almighty wo shall bless thee. Gen. 49:25. 
But we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we 
should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth 
the dead: who delivered us from so a great a death; in 
whom we trust that he will yet deliver us. 2 Cor. 1:9-10. 
For what nation is there so great. who hath God so nigh 
unto them as the Lord our God is in all things that we 
call upon him for? Deut. 4:7. 

Who is like unto thee, O people! saved by the Lord, the 
shield of thy help, avd who is the sword of thy excel- 


46 James Moses Grainger 


lency. Deut. 33:29. (Relative clause coordinate with 
apposition. ) 

Frequently the clause introduced by who states a fact 
which is either generally known or has just been explained. 
’ In these cases who carries with it some such significance as 
‘‘as you know” or ‘‘of course.” The sixth chapter of Judges 
explains Gideon’s surname, Jerubaal, and chapter seven 
begins: 

Then Jerubaal, who is Gideon, and all the people that 
were with him, rose up early. Judges 7:1. 

These are the sons of Esau, whois Edom. Gen. 36:19. 
Sihon, king of the Amorites, who dwelt in Heshbon. 
Joshua 12:2. 

They took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son, who dwelt in 
Sodom. Gen. 14:12. 

Aud Moses told Aaron all the words of the Lord who 
had sent him. Ex. 4:28. 

Though who vastly preponderates in this particular field, 
the following examples show that it is not the only pronoun 
so used: 

A nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand, a 
nation of fierce countenance, which shall not regard the 
person of the old, nor show favor to the young: and he 


shall) eat the fruit of thy cattle) (0 sy which Valse 
shall not leave thee either corn, wine, or oil. Deut. 
28:49-50-51. 


That the cruelty done to the threescore and ten sons of | 
Jerubaal might come, and their blood be laid upon 
Abimelech their brother, whch slew them; and upon 
the men of Shechem. whzch aided him in killing his 
brethren. Judges 9:24. 


I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which 
(although I) am but dust and ashes. Gen. 18:27. 

The Lord sent a prophet unto the children of Israel, 
which said unto them. Judges 6:8. 

And the men which Moses sent to search out the land, 
who returned and made the congregation to murmur, 


Syntax of the King James Version AZ 


even those men ¢ha/ did bring up the evil report 
on the land, died by the plague. Num. 14:36-37. 


2. Who asa regular relative. 


Who occurs occasionally as a regular relative introducing a 
clause which simply‘characterizes or defines the antecedent. 
In this use it is usually non-restrictive hoe sometimes 
restrictive. 


(a) Non-restrictive: 


And Hadad the son of Bedad, who smote Midian in the 
field of Moab, reigned in his stead. Gen. 36:35. 
Better is a poor and a wise child than an old and foolish 
king, who will no more be admonished. Eccl. 4:13, 
The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I 
love in truth. 2 John 1:1. 
Tell me, O thou whom my soul loveth. Songs 1:7. 
And there he put the man whom he had formed. Gen. 
2:8. 
These be they who separate themselves. Jude 1:19. 
And there was a young man out of Bethlehem-Judah, of 
the family of Judah, who was a Levite, and he sojourned 
there. Judges 17:7. 

(b) Restrictive: 
All the Canaanites /Aat dwell in the land of the valley 
have chariots of iron, both they who are of Bethshear 
and her towers and they wo are of the valley of Jezreel. 
Joshua 17:16. 
The man, who is lord of the land, ets roughly to us. 
Gen. 42:30. 
And this commandment have we from him, That he who 
loveth God love his brother also. 1 John 4:21. 
For not he ¢hat commendeth himself is approved, but 
whom the Lord commendeth. 2 Cor. 10:18. 
Come and I will show you the man whom thou seekest, 
Judges 4:22. 
Did I make a gain of you by any of them whom I sent 


48 James Moses Grainger 


unto you? 2 Cor. 12:17. 
Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest. Kccl. 9:9. 
(Restrictive for Solomon.) 


3. Whose, the only possessive relative. 


Whose serves as possessive for all three relative pronouns 
in Bible English and refers to both persons and things. Of 
which is never possessive: 

She also bare him a son whose name he called Abimelech. 
Judges 8:31. 

And all the women whose hearts stirred them up in wis- 
dom spun goats’ hair. Ex. 35:26. 

The pride of thine heart hath deceived thee, thou ¢hat 
dwellest in the clefts of the rock, whose habitation is 
high; ¢hat saith in his heart. Ob. 1:3. 


Joseph is a fruitful bough . . . whose branches run 
over the wall. Gen. 49:22. 
These (sinners) are . . . trees whose fruit wither- 


eth.) WJuderlsi2; 

A land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills thou 
mayest dig brass. Deut. 8:9. 

Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may 
reach unto heaven. Gen. 11:4. 

And the bullock . . . and the goat for the sin offer- 
ing, whose blood was brought in, Lev. 16:27. 


Whose is sometimes equivalent to a conjunction and a pos- 
sessive pronoun: 


Art thou better than populous No, zkat was situated 
among the rivers, hat had the waters round about it, 
whose rampart was the sea, and her wall was from the 
sea? Nahum 3:8. 

Now these are the kings of the land which the children 
of Israel smote ad possessed ¢hezr land on the other side 
Jordan. Joshua 12:1. . 


4. Whom wth prepositions. 


Whom is the relative pronoun always used after preposi- 


Syntax of the King James Version 49 


tions when the antecedent is a person. Which with prepo- 
sitions does not refer to persons: 
Give me my wives and my children for whom I have 
served thee. Gen, 30:26. 
The Lord before whom I wall will send his angel with 
thee. Gen. 24:40. 
This is the law of him zz whom is the plague of leprosy. 
Lev. 14:32. 
There be just men wnrlo whom it happeneth according to 
the work of the wicked. Eccl. 8:14. 
Wandering stars fo whom is reserved the blackness of 
darkness forever. Jude 1:13. 


5. Whom 77 a6 Kowov: 


How shall I curse whom God hath not cursed? or how 
shall I defy whom the Lord hath not defied? Num. 23:8. 


6. Who wth antecedent in possessive: 


I would lead thee and bring thee unto my mother’s house, 
who would instruct me. Songs 8:2. 

Laid it upon Lphraim’s head, who was the younger. 
Gen. 48:14. 

Am Jin God's stead who hath withheld from thee the 
fruit of the womb? Gen. 30:2. 


CHAPTER, VI 


SUBJUNCTIVE Moop 


The use of the subjunctive in the King James Version is 
characterized by great looseness and irregularity due to the 
unfixed state of English syntax during the period from which 
the English Bible drew its idiom, 1535-1611. By 1611 the 
use of may, might, would, and should, as auxiliaries to 
express the subjunctive, was almost as fully developed, though 
not so prevalently used, astoday. The Bible, while showing 
a marked preference for the old direct subjunctive forms on 
account, no doubt, of their brevity, archaic dignity, and more 
popular sound, nevertheless admitted the newer periphrastic 
forms in practically all constructions requiring subjunctive. 
This freedom of choice, practiced in a work so authoritative 
and so widely and thoroughly disseminated as the authorized 
Bible, doubtless did much to preserve the old as well as to 
propagate the new forms in the subsequent development of 
the language. Although in the natural levelling of inflec- 
tions, the place of the old one-word subjunctive forms has 
been practically occupied by the auxiliary or periphrastic 
forms in plain English of today, nevertheless the old forms 
are still permissible and not rare in some kinds of writing, 
especially poetry. This preservation of two styles of sub- 
junctive is a distinct advantage to the language. 

The tendency, which is now well developed, to substitute 
the indicative outright for the subjunctive appears just 
incipient in the King James Version, which*no doubt has 
thrown the weight of its influence against this tendency. 
The commonest verbs, such as 6e, go, and do, use the sub- 
junctive almost invariably, though even with them an indica- 
tive form is sometimes seen masquerading where a subjunc- 
tive would be expected and might seem more regular. Such 
substitution often seems merely a matter of caprice, some- 


Syntax of the King James Version 51 


times of euphony, and sometimes the result of particuar influ- 
ences. No absolute rules can be laid down for the practice. 

The examples given below show the principal usages and — 
constructions in which the subjunctive appears, under the 
following heads: 


1. Subjunctive in conditional sentences. 
2. In concessions. 
3. In temporal clauses with a sense of suspense. 
4, In final clauses. 
5. In consecutive clauses. 
6. In substantive clauses. 
7.. Optative subjunctive. 
8. In indirect questions. 
9. In main clauses. 
10. ‘‘As it were’, ‘‘if it were.” 


1. Sudbjunctive in conditional sentences. 


A. In unreal conditional sentences, the subjunctive is regular 
in the protasis and often appears in the apodosis also, 
though usually displaced in the latter by a periphrasis with 
would or should. A periphrasis rarely displaces the sub- 
junctive in the protasis of an unreal condition. 


(a) Subjunctive in protasis: 


It thou do these things, shew thyself to the world. 
John 7:4. 

Tell the stars, if thou de able to number them. Gen. 
iNeS-te 

If the Lord were pleased to kill us, he would not have 
received a burnt offering at our hands. Judges 13:23. 


(6) Subjunctive in apodosis: 


If the whole body weve an eye, where were the hearing? 
If the whole weve hearing, where were the smelling? 
1, CORA 7 

If we had been sold for bondmen and bondwomen, I had 
held my tongue, Esther 7:4. 


52 James Moses Grainger ~ 


If thou hadst been here, my brother fad not died. John 
ibs gee 


(c) Subjunctive in protasts: 


The verb de in the protasis of unreal conditions is regu- 
larly subjunctive. Less common verbs, however, on which 
the subjunctive has a weaker hold, sometimes permit the 
indicative: 

Jesus answered and said unto her, if thou newest the 
gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to 
drink, thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would 
have given thee living water. John 4:10. 

Lord, if thou ads¢t been here, my brother had not died. 
John 11:21 and 32. 

Why dost thou as if thou hads¢ not received it. 1 Cor. 
4:7. 

In these cases the indicative form may have displaced a 
regular subjunctive on account of the proximity of the pro- 
noun, ¢hou, which, of course, in the vast majority of cases 
required the second personal ending s¢in the verb. In such 
case the indicative form is used in obedience to the law of 
analogy and for the sake of sound, the influence of person 
being stronger than that of mood in determining the form of 
the verb. The subjunctive is clearly losing ground and the 
cases of indicative forms in subjunctive territory, quoted above, 
are sporadic lapses in favor of the new tendency*. ‘There is 
a feeling also in each case that the tense of the verb, where- 
by the unreal significance is conveyed, carries something of a 
subjunctive effect without the subjunctive form. 


*The verb have, also, which appears in two of the examples quoted above, 
was wavering between the habits of the independent verb, which it had 
been, with full subjunctive forms, and an auxiliary verb, which it was 
fast becoming, with none but indicative forms. As the auxiliary of the 
perfect tenses it later displaced be with many verbs, witness: the verb come, 
which in the Bible occurred with be, as in, is come, was come, ete., but 
now uses has come, had come, etc. As it gained in strength as an auxiliary 
verb, it lost the power of an independent verb to conjugate in the sub- 
junctive. Though in the Morte ad’ Arthur, have stood alone with be as an 


ro | 
we 


Syntax of the King James Version 


B. In zdeal and anticipatory conditions, where nothing is 
implied as to reality or unreality, the mood of verbs varies 
between the subjunctive, the periphrasis with auxiliaries, and 
the indicative. The subjunctive mood, however, rules. ‘I‘he 
following examples show the different modes of expression: 


(a) Subjunctive mood in ideal conditions: 


If thou de the Christ tell us plainly. John 10:24. 

If it please the king, let it be granted to the Jews. 
Esther 9:13. 

If the cloud were not taken up, then they journeyed not 
till the day that it was taken up. Ex. 40:37. 

If aman /ove me, he will keep my words. John 14:23. 

If thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy 
borders with frogs. Ex. 8:2. 

If a woman fave conceived seed. Lev. 12:2. 

I will give you for your cattle, if money faz/. Gen. 47:16. 
If he repent, forgive him.) Lu. 17:3. 

If thou de a great people, then get thee up to the wood 
country . . . if Mount Ephraim de too narrow for 
thee. Joshua 17:15. 


exception to the tendency toward the disuse of the subjunctive, (Baldwin, 
Inflections and Syntax of Malory’s Morte d’ Arthur), the following examples show 
how in Bible English it was wavering between the fully conjugated inde- 
pendent verb and the subjunctiveless auxiliary : 
But if the ox were (subjunctive) wont to push with his horns in time 
past, and it hath (indicative) been testified to hisowner, and he hath 
(indicative) not kept him in, but that he hath (indicative) killed a 
man or a woman, the ox snall be stoned. Ex. 21:29. 
If no man have (subjunctive) lain with thee, and if thou hast (indie- 


ative) not gone asideto uncleanness, . . . befree . . . But if 
thou hast (indic.) gone aside . . . and if thou be (subj.) defiled, 


and some man have (subj.) lain with thee beside thine husband 

the Lord make thee a curse. Num. 5:19. 

If the witness be (subj.) a false witness and hath (indic.) testified falsely 
againt his brother. Deut. 19:18. 

Sir, if thou have (subj.) borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid 
him. John 20;15, . 


54 


James Moses Grainger 


(6) Mood varying. 


If any man Je a worshipper of God and doeth his will, 
him he heareth. John 9:31. 

If there avzse among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, 
and gzveth thee a sign or a wonder, . . . thou shalt 
not hearken.)) Dent) 5137-3: 

And if a soul szv, and ear the voice of swearing, and zs 
a witness, whether he hath seen or known of it, if he do 
not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity. Lev. 5:1. 
If the witness d¢ a false witness and ath testified falsely 
against his brother, then shall ye do unto him as he had 
thought to have done unto his brother. Deut. 19:18, 19. 
If he t@rust him suddenly without enmity, or ave cast 
upon him anything without laying of wait, . . . and 
was not his enemy . . . the congregation shall 
judge. Num. 35:22-24. 

If a soul sez and commitatrespass . . . and “e unto 
his neighbor . . . or hath deceived his neighbor; or 
have found that which was lost and /ze¢h concerning it, 
and. ssweareth \talsely; 0), 2)).. then it: Shall sbegthat, 
etc. Lev. 6:2, 3, 4. 

And if thou se// ought unto thy neighbor, or duyest ought 
of thy neighbor’s hand, ye shall not oppress one another. 
Lev. 25:14. 


(c) Condition with if that = if: 


Thou shalt be above only and thou shalt not be beneath, 
if that thou hearken unto the commandment. Deut. 
a8ii3. 

/f the priest look on the plague of the scall, and behold 
it be not in sight deeper than the skin, and //at there is 
no black hair in it, then the priest shall shut him up. 
Lev. 13:31. 


(d) If so NT 


If so be the Lord will help me, then I shall be able to 
drive them out. Joshua 14:12. 


Syntax of the King James Version 55 


(eye And = zf: 
For how shall Icome up to my father, and the lad be 
not with me? Gen. 44:34. 


(f) If omitted with inverted protasis: 


I would make the remembrance of them to cease from: 
among men, were zt not that I feared the wrath of the 
enenty. Deut: 32:26, 27. 
Were zt not that I regard the presence of Jehoshaphat, 

I would not look toward thee. 2 Kings 3:14. 


(2) Subjunctive in double conditions: 


Whether he ave gored a son or have gored a daughter, 
according to his judgment shall it be done unto him. 
Wx 21664: 

Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preached and 
so ye believed. 1 Cor. 15:11. 

Whether it de beast or man, it shall not live. Ex. 19:13. 


(h) Subjunctive with the indefinite relative: 


Whosoever he be that doth rebel . ... he shall be put 

to death. Joshua 1:18. 

Or if he touch the uncleanness of man, wha/soever 

uncleanness it de . . and it de hid from him, 

he shall be guilty. Lev. 5:3. 

(2) Subjunctive after unless or except = if not: 

(Indicative rare: four examples. ) 

The soul which hath touched any such shall be unclean 
unless he wash his flesh with water. Lev. 22:6. 

Except your youngest brother come down with you, ye 

shall see my face no more. Gen. 44:23. 

Except acorn of wheat /a// into the ground and die, 

it abideth alone; but ifit die, it bringeth forth much 

fruit. John 12:24. 


56 James Moses Grainger 


2. Subjunctive in Concessive Sentences. 


In concessions introduced by though and although*, the 
mood is regularly subjunctive if the reference is general or to 
future time; and even when the reference is definite or refers 
to an assured fact in present or past time the subjunctive 
sometimes occurs, though usually the indicative or a periphras- 
tic subjunctive: 

Though he s/ay me, yet will I trust him. Job 13:15. 
Though he fa//, he shall not be utterly cast down. Ps. 
37:24, 

He that believeth in me, though he weve dead, yet shall 
hei lived) John 11:25. 

Although my house de not so with God, yet he hath 
made with me an everlasting covenant. 2 Sam. 23:5. 
Though thou defazn me, I will not eat. Judges 13:16. 
Though he (Jesus) weve a son, yet learned he obedience. 
Heb. '5;8. 

Though I de absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the 
spirit.) |: Coli2 75. 


3. Subjunctive in temporal clauses with a sense of suspense. 


In temporal clauses with an idea of suspense or condition 
or doubt or contingency, introduced by such words as wnitzl, 
till, against, etc., the subjunctive mood appears when the 
tense looks toward the future. With the past tense, of course, 
there being no contingency, the mood is indicative: 

They shall pursue thee until thou perish. Deut. 28:22. 

I will tarry until thou come again. Judges 6:18. 

He shall not lie down until he eat of the prey and drink 
the blood of the slain. Num. 23:24. 

Until the day dveak and the shadows fice away, I will get 
me to the mountains of myrrh. Songs 4:6. 


*Although is used only with concessions in which the fact referred to is 
ssured and real, the mood being almost altogether indicative (one excep- 
tion); and with though, when the sense of it is rather even though, the mood 
is generally subjunctive; when it is simply although, the mood is generally 
indicative. Although occurs 8 times; though oceurs 80 times. 


Syntax of the King James Version 57 


Thou shalt stand by the river’s brink against he come. 
xe 415. 

So do God unto me and more also, if I taste bread . 

till the sun de down. 2 Sam. 3:35. 

Now I tell you before it come. John 13:19. 

Doth our law judge any man before it ear him and 
know what he doeth. John 7:51. 

Remember thy Creator . . . or ever the silver cord 
be loosed. Eccl. 12:1-6. 

And we, or ever he come near, are ready to kill him. 
AO 25:15: 


4. Subjunctive in final clauses. 


In final clauses auxiliary periphrases with may, might, and 
should are used most frequently. The subjunctive: appears 
mostly in commands or exhortations containing a negative 
or introduced by /est implying a negative. 

And they shall bind the breastplate . . . that it may 
be above the curious girdle of the ephod, and that the 
breastplate de not loosed from the ephod. Ex. 28:28. 

Sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee. John 
apa ke 

Let us make us a name lest we de scattered abroad. 
Gen. 11:4. 

They shall wash with water that they dave not. Ex. 30:20. 
Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing d¢ 
lost. John 6:12. 

I cannot escape to the mountains lest some evil overtake 
me and) Wee.) Gen 19:19. 


5. Subjunctive in consecutive clauses. 


In consecutive clauses the subjunctive is well nigh confined 
to the expression ‘‘that he die” which occurs repeatedly 
in laws of punishment and elsewhere. Auxiliary peri- 
" phrases are usual and the indicative occasional. 
Thou shalt stone him with stones that he dze. Deut. 
1370: 


58 James Moses Grainger 


He that smiteth a man so that he de, shall be surely put 
to death. Ex. 21:12, 

Who can tell if God will repent and turn away from his 
fierce anger that we perish not? Jonah 3:9. 


6. Subjunctive tn substantive clauses. 


In noun clauses the subjunctive appears sporadically, 
though usually yielding place to a periphrasis. The follow- 
ing varieties have been observed with the subjunctive: (a) 
clauses of apposition or expectation, (b) complementary final 
clauses, (c) after would: 


(a) Clauses of apposition: 
It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about 
hisimeck. yall. 17:2. 
Lest . . . it come to pass that he 6/ess himself. 
Deut. 29:18-19. 

(b) ‘‘Complementary final clauses .”’* 


Take heed that thou speak not to Jacob. Gen. 31:24. 
Pray unto the Lord that he takeaway the serpents from 
us. Num. 21:7. 

Speak unto Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest; that he 
lake up the censers. Num. 16:37. 

See that thou do all these wonders before Pharaoh. Ex. 
shea be 

Be sure that thou eat not the blood. Deut. 12:23. 
Beware that thou fass not such a place. 2 Kings 6:9. 


(c) After would: (See also Optative Subjunctive below.) 


I would there were a sword in mine hand. Num. 22:59. 
Would God my lord were with the prophet. 2 Kings 
tee 
7. Optative Subjunciive. 
Optative sentences, being the objects of verbs of wishing 


understood, might be considered a variety of substantive 


*Gildersleeve’s Latin Grammar, Sec. 546. 


—————— 


Syntax af the King James Version 59 


clause, and they no doubt take the subjunctive mood from 
something of the same feeling, though of course the actual 
relation does not appear. Besides ordinary wishes this 
group includes blessings, curses, permissions, etc. 

Therefore God gzve thee the dew of heaven. Gen, 27:28. 

O that there weve such an heart in them. Deut. 5:29. 

O that I weve asin months past. Job 29:2. 

This heap de witness and this pillar de witness. Gen. 

31:52. 

Would God it were even. Deut. 28:67. 

Peace de unto you. John 20:19. 

Blessed de he that enlargeth God. Deut. 33:20. 

Now he that ministereth seed to the sower both mznzster 

bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown. 

2 Cor. 9:10, 

Cursed de every one that curseth thee, and blessed de he 

that blesseth' thee. Gen. 27:29. 

Cursed de Canaan. Gen. 9:25, 

God do so tome. 1 Kings 2:23. 

His blood de upon us and on our children. Matt. 27:25. 


8. Subjunctive in endirect questions. 


In indirect questions the subjunctive appears occasionally, 
though usually displaced by the indicative: 

All men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were 
the Christ or not. Lu. 3:15. 
Come near I pray thee that I may feel thee, my son, 
whether thou de my very son Esau or not. Gen. 27:21. 
When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the man 
were a Galilean. Lu. 23:6. 
The Pharisees had given commandment that if any man 
knew where he were, he should shew it. John 11:57. 


9. Subjunctive in main clause. 


In sentences containing a substantive clause expressing a 
hypothetical or contemplated action the preterit subjunc- 
tive sometimes occurs in the main clause: 


60 James Moses Grainger 


It weve better for him that a millstone were hanged 
about his neck ........ than that he should offend one 
of these little ones. Lu. 17:2. 

Were it not better for us to return unto the land of 
Kgypt? Num. 14:3 

That were a reproach unto us. Gen. 34:14. 

I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, 
than to dwellin the tents of wickedness. Ps. 84:10. 
I had rather speak five words with my understanding 
........ than ten thousand words in an unknown 
toneges il Corl 4:19. 


10. “t Ase were’, ‘tf et were’. 


The subjunctive mood appears repeatedly in the clause ‘‘as 
it were”. apparently with a limiting significance or a toning 
down of an exaggerated or figurative expression. ~°‘/¢t were’’ 
could usually be omitted without destroying the connection, 
but not without losing a certain apologetic turn of sense. 
This use seems entirely in keeping with the usual signifi- 
cance of the subjunctive mood. ‘‘/f ¢t were” occurs once 
with somewhat the same meaning. 

Woe unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, 
and sin as zt were with a cart rope. Isa. 5:18. 

And his sweat was, as 7/ were, great drops of blood. Lu. 
22:44, 

At even there was upon the tabernacle, as zt were, the 
appearance of fire. Num. 9:15. 

He hath, as zt were, the strength of an unicorn. Num. 
23:22. 

Then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as 
zt were in secret. John 7:10. 

I speak ........ as 24: were foolishly. 2 Cor. 11:17. 

They bought him that they might touch ¢/ 7t were but 
the border of his garment. Mk. 6:56. 





MNT 





Pansy 
Pe i 4 





